Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clayton Moore said:
What is the dust of a CD'ed building? Pulverized cement from the explosives?
Click to expand...

No. You'd know that already if you had watched the videos I posted for you and truthfully answered my questions.
In particular, the videos of non-explosive Verinage demolition show you that major dust ejections, just as were seen at the WTC, result from nothing but gravitational collapse (or destruction, if you prefer :rolleyes:)
 
Clayton Moore said:
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/02/debunker-verinage-fantasies-are-bunk.html

So I'm guessing verinage takes little preparation and the building pulverizes and demolishes itself.
Click to expand...

Dude, the whole point of using gravity for demolition is so the materials are pulverized and demolished.

Why else?

Can you imagine what it would take to pulverize everything with explosives rather than gravity? It wouldn't be safe or cost effective.....

That is the main reason why real CD's don't usually progress at 'freefall', because structure is being broken into pieces...

Oh well, too bad you don't get any of this. Your loss.
 
alienentity said:
Dude, the whole point of using gravity for demolition is so the materials are pulverized and demolished.

Why else?

Can you imagine what it would take to pulverize everything with explosives rather than gravity? It wouldn't be safe or cost effective.....

That is the main reason why real CD's don't usually progress at 'freefall', because structure is being broken into pieces...

Oh well, too bad you don't get any of this. Your loss.
Click to expand...

You're kidding? Your response is surreal.
 
Clayton Moore said:
You're kidding? Your response is surreal.
Click to expand...

Your knowledge is sadly lacking...

' the non-blast floors need the force of the impact in order to break-up. Even on the blast floors, the perimeter walls above the ground floor are usually not charged for safety reasons, and they are expected to break up by impact. The entire process is driven by gravity but the downward velocities are attenuated by the energy absorption at the point of impact'

By this they refer to the impact of the collapsing mass on the structures below.

"Factors Affecting the Numerical Modelling of Demolition by Explosives" In Transactions on the Built Environment, Vol 8 (1994)

Pulverize - to demolish or crush completely.

Explosives are not used in CD's to crush the building into rubble. It is gravity that performs this work. Period.
 
I suppose Clayton wouldn't be able to demonstrate that the energy required to break up concrete was not available in the case of the WTC towers?

I'd like to see that math, please. In fact the contrary has already been given by a number of physics experts using publicly available data. Clayton is perhaps unaware of the existence of this work, or the physics behind it.
 
Oystein said:
No. You'd know that already if you had watched the videos I posted for you and truthfully answered my questions.
In particular, the videos of non-explosive Verinage demolition show you that major dust ejections, just as were seen at the WTC, result from nothing but gravitational collapse (or destruction, if you prefer :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...



Oystein, do you think that the concrete floors (which are porous) could have beeen impregnated with nanothermite ? When ignited that would instantly boil any water residue in the concrete,blow the concrete into a fine dust and vapourise the rebar in the floors, the floor pans and the steel decking, all of which are largely missing in the rubble pile.

The iron microspheres (which are a product of vapourised steel) are found distributed throughout the WTC dust .I understand that the the further away from the building the less microspheres which indicates that the focus for the source was the building. The distribution of the dust over the debris field and much of lower Manhatter would rule rule out the incendiary nanothermite that was in the hollow core columns being the source of the unreacted nanothermite so it must have come from the floors.

Maybe that's why we have tiny pieces of unreacted thermite with a grey layer . The grey layer might have been like the skin on a rice pudding as Sunstealer would say with some unreacted nanothermite from the impregnated concrete still attached and ejected so quickly that not all of it ignited.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Oystein, do you think that the concrete floors (which are porous) could have beeen impregnated with nanothermite ? When ignited that would instantly boil any water residue in the concrete,blow the concrete into a fine dust and vapourise the rebar in the floors, the floor pans and the steel decking, all of which are largely missing in the rubble pile.

The dust with the iron microspheres (which are a product of vapourised steel) are found distributed throughout the WTC dust .I understand that the the further away from the building the less microspheres which indicates that the focus for the source was the building. The distribution of the dust over the debris field and much of lower Manhatter would rule rule out the incendiary nanothermite that was in the hollow core columns being the source of the unreacted nanothermite so it must have come from the floors.

Maybe that's why we have tiny pieces of unreacted thermite with a grey layer . The grey layer might have been like the skin on a rice pudding as Sunstealer would say with some unreacted nanothermite from the impregnated concrete still attached and ejected so quickly that not all of it ignited.
Click to expand...

Bill, you need to tell your mother those mushrooms she has picked in the park and cooked for you are the wrong ones!:eye-poppi
 
Clayton Moore said:
If you noticed the upper floors kept disappearing so where was the weight that pile drivered each tower into dust?
Click to expand...

If I have a two ton concrete slab and I break it up, I still have two tons of concrete.

Another thing. Look at the videos. The term "pile drivered" you used is incorrect. The top "block" not drive the lower "block" into the ground.
 
ergo said:
Just show me another gravity-only driven collapse that produces such ejections and I'll believe you. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not the first time in history argument..........:rolleyes:

You can even use WTC7 as an example, if you want. It was half the height of the towers. Where are the ejections from its descent?
Click to expand...

not a tube in tube, front half collapsed first so north face has no place to build up pressure and lastly the collapse zone is out of sight at the bottom of the building not high up as on the Towers.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Ah yes, but where did the dust and ejected people bits come from?
Click to expand...
Dust came from pulverization during collapse of buildings at over 100 mph, lots of momentum as I explained in videos 1 and 4.

BTW I have been resisting spending the time taking all 235 reasons from my Power Point presentation and copy/pasting them over to Word, but I may break down and do this.
 
ergo said:
Just show me another gravity-only driven collapse that produces such ejections and I'll believe you. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Show me ANY demolition or collapse that pertained to a skyscraper that had a tube in tube design using structural steel.

ergo said:
You can even use WTC7 as an example, if you want. It was half the height of the towers. Where are the ejections from its descent?
Click to expand...

So you want to use a building that had a totally different set of circumstances regarding it's collapse AND had a totally different design?

:rolleyes:

That's like comparing the crash test results for a semi and a compact car.
 
FineWine said:
So, the question remains, why do you enjoy being beaten to a pulp and humiliated? You're never right. You always lose. Your lies always get exposed. How does your insane movement profit from your constant failures?
Click to expand...

cyclonic said:
Bill, you need to tell your mother those mushrooms she has picked in the park and cooked for you are the wrong ones!:eye-poppi
Click to expand...

He enjoys the frisson.

bill smith said:
Sorry folks. Looks like the show's over for now. Tune in again for another episode of 'debunker tail-twisting' produced and directed by bill smith.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom